"Laws cannot change what is in people's hearts and minds."

Issue Topic: "It is possible to pass laws that control or place limits on people's behavior, but legislation cannot reform human nature. Laws cannot change what is in people's hearts and minds."

I disagree. Implication of rules and laws places the limit on people's conducts. Human behavior is mutable. They are bound to execute those activities which are acceptable to the law. Their submissive and slavish qualities make them to accept those changes. And after a significant amount of time, those changes convert into habits. These habits put an impact on thought process. People starting thing in the same way what they conduct in their quotidian. Here starts change of mind, behavior and nature. And, over a period of time heart and mind of people will change and it will take a particular shape given by law.

Many examples can be given, starting from India; thousands of years ago laws divided its people into four categories as Brahmins, Kshatriya (fighters), Vaishya and Shudra according to their function, businesses and professions. Brahmins were pundits, very superior class of India as they were indulged in religious activities and they were also advisers of the king in good conduct of kingdom. Kshatriya were fighter and vaishyas were business man. Old law categorized some people as the most inferior class and they were called shudra. Gone are the days, but, India is suffering from caste problems. Initially it was just a law that a particular group of people will do their assigned job but the laws imposed in the day of yore's have changed mind and perception of people. They consider their job as religion. The superior class people, Brahmins, still are not ready to accept the fact that shudra and other backward classes have equal rights and have equal opportunity to express them.

Further, if we look into process of the development of human, we will encounter a noticeable fact how human behavior changed over time under LAW OF NATURE. At the beginning, we were just like other animals but changing nature's law compelled us to change our heart and mind. Fear of tempest and torrential rains forced us to look for shelters. Fear of wild animals forced us to live in groups and need of food taught us how to make spear, shaft and lance. This changing law of nature continuously changed our mind and doings. And finally, we are turned into Homo sapiens.

Now, considering the issue from another angle and pondering over the rules and laws floating in the country and society, these rules and laws are not permanent and are labile to change. Different people may have different opinion about these. People are controlled by these laws but under duress of government. Even government changes these rules and regulations according to their need and also according to demand of time therefore these laws does not have a marquee effect on the heart and mind of people. So these vacillations make the law to control behavior of people but they are unable to control their inner feeling and psyche.

In conclusion, the changeable nature of human under the change of effective law will fetch a new era. I even encounter this quality of human as its admirable attribute. Many species from earth has been lost it is only we who are surviving due to this virtue. Now a day, we are facing scourge of global warming and certainly this change in law of nature will show us the way to survive.

"The study of an academic discipline alters the way we perceive the world. After studying the discipline, we see the same world as before, but with di

Issue Topic: "The study of an academic discipline alters the way we perceive the world. After studying the discipline, we see the same world as before, but with different eyes."

I support the above statement... Human brain is very much like a machine, controlled by hormones. Whatever input you provide, the same class of outcome you will get. Similarly, as an input the knowledge of academic discipline creates background, and results in the way how we comprehend and perceive the world. Technically, all theses phenomena are quite biological. It is perception that Mathematics students are rather destructive in nature whereas Art students are cool and composed. All these are effects of hormones flowing in the body. These flows of hormones are regulated by our activities. It may be our meeting with different people, indulgence in other conducts or it may be the knowledge of academic discipline. And this is the main reason why different people have different opinion on the same topic or why the same person thinks differently after the exchange of knowledge.

I have studied in my school days, the two poets William Wordsworth and Robert Herrick composed poems on the daffodil flower. “Daffodils” by W. Wordsworth and “To Daffodils” by Robert Herrick. Wordsworth gave his optimistic view and praises the beauty of the flower throughout the composition. On the other hand, Robert H. says that “hey daffodils! You are fugitive and you will die soon” and shows his pessimistic view. The difference arises between them certainly because of their different surroundings and knowledge as Robert H. is poet of 17^Th century and W. Wordsworth, romantic poet of 19^Th century.

Many examples are spread around, the famous freedom fighter of Indian history Saint Arbindo Ghosh; initially his involvement in the freedom of India was as an extremist. Later on, when he studied Indian philosophy and come in intimacy with true Hinduism; he left his view as an extremist. The above fact can be supported by his opinion indited in his book “The Life Divine”. Further, being a student of chemical engineering I started observing the world chemically and even more mathematically. This was not the case before when I was in my high school. The differences come into play when I got involved in the same field. I started reflecting it clearly. This is not in my case only but a generalized truth.

The other thing is that it is not only knowledge of academic discipline but also other equipments that change the view of the observer how he perceives the world. These things are change in time period, nature of era and relationship of human behavior with social environment. The above argument can be supported by the fact that an individual born 50 years ago has different opinion about the world scenario than other person of the same discipline born today. Observations will change at regular time intervals with influencing factors.

The knowledge of academic discipline is, of course, like a tool and human behavior is to carry out the experiments with instruments all the time. Comparing the surrounding around them and perceiving on the basis of their knowledge is their basic instinct.

"The function of science is to reassure; the purpose of art is to upset. Therein lies the value of each".

The topic is still debatable that which is better, Science or Art. I am against the motion that science sooths and art breaks you. Science stands for reassurance do not suit. It seems bit imposing. Where as, the statement 'the purpose of the art is to upset' shows pessimistic thought of the supporter. How art of living can throw one into abyss? How a mellifluous music can upset one? And, how the knowledge of spirituality can lead a person to the dark? Even, this is art that exudes substances, spirituality and serenity. One can feel the coolness and solitude, the beauty of it.

Against the reassurance of science, I can give various examples. It is the scientific discovery which snatched the happiness of Japanese in 1945. One Hydrogen bomb on Nagasaki and another on Hiroshima brought the dooms day in the history of the world. Till date, Japanese are not able to come out of that nightmare. People are physically handicapped from their childhood due to the long lasting effect of that nuclear power. But, in the present time Japanese are popular for their patriotism and nationalism, they are still able to save their art and culture.

I am not going to criticize one but the war between United States of America and Iraq is the result of science and technological development. Scientific researches and discoveries in developed countries want more resources. And in order to get recourses they attack on developing nations. They are looting oil from Iraq. Every day they perform testing of nuclear energy and have objection if other countries like India, Pakistan, Iran and Israel do the same. These wars and polarization of the world is only the result of science.

Apart from it, science has its own advantages, it give one the new amplitude of cerebration process. If atomic energy causes destruction on the other hand it is source of energy that is widely used for the growth of human being. But the statement that art makes one upset does not seem of much value. Art is that key thing which made the human culture civilized. In ancient books like Vedas, Geeta and many more, it is mentioned that infinite energy can be generated by yoga and other way of meditation. This is not just a belief, Indian scientists are working on those books, and they are trying to unravel enigmas hidden in manuscripts. Even they are successful to some extent. In Ramayana and Mahabharata immense energy of God is discussed, Brahmastras are discussed they are synonymous of Nuclear energies and missiles. The need is to find the way how we can get those powers again.

In conclusion, I would say Art is the weapon which shows us the era of renaissance and revival. It really reassures us. But on the other hand, science is not just Yin; it has its own greatness. Both are complementary for each other. If art is light the science can be tower. Both together can make a beacon. The light is inspiration.